Hello every one i am very happy today to share this great testimony with you, I contacted Dr Aluya in regards of my lover. He no longer wanted to associate with me anymore. He was interested in working out his marriage, after begging and pleading with him I realized it was out of my hands, he really was leaving me. My co-worker went through a similar situation and told me that you had helped her. I can't say how much I'm grateful she introduced me to you. After discussing the resolution with you, you get your lover back spell has done more than what I expected. My lover not only came back to me, but has left his wife and now we are engaged, we are getting married next year, I don't know what I would have done without you. I believe you are my guardian angel you can contact him Via Email email@example.com
Gotta be great when you have an idea that doesn't need all that graphics time, too.
(Conversely, a way to fill a blog entry without doing much work [grin].)
Who cares - they're funny....
BTW, this one reminds me of the "Fugawi" joke that got past the censors on Johnny Carson's show years ago. "From deep in the mighty jungle comes the mournful cry of the lost Fugawi tribe: 'We're the Fugawi"'.)
@whtllnew - I read the blog yesterday & what he wrote is in no way mutually exclusive from what I said. if you've followed him for any time (I have since mid-90s when I was working at a different larGe TElco) you know he's a master of misdirection. maybe it wasn't his original intent but I assure he's smart enough to realize the potential time gained from reusing art! my situation is still far from his but we (wife & I) are somewhat past the inflection point where uncommitted time is significantly more scare than uncommitted cash flow & I'm pretty confident he thinks similarly. the only downside I see it limited merchandising potential - not so much products as there's only one piece of art. OTOH, I wouldn't put it past him to turn this into the blue duck either...
In the spirit of comics experimentation, I have another strip idea for you.
It's called "Mexican Standoff Guys". 3 identical panels showing 2 Mexican guys wearing sombreros and bandoliers, pointing guns at each other. They never say anything other than "I'm going to kill you", or "You so much as twitch and I'll shoot", or similiar things such as that. And it goes on like that, day after day. Since it's so handy re-using art, it would be doubly nice using the same jokes every day.
is this an experiment to see if Scott can make a viable cartoon where he never has to do any actual ART?!? just type in three pieces of text & BOOM! (yes, I realize that figuring out those texts is non-trivial, just that given Scott's past drawing hand problems it certainly passes the plausibility test he might try something like this)
The general problem with puns is that to understand them one must be familiar not only with the language in which they are written, but often with the particular subculture (or subbacultcha, if you prefer) in which they make sense.
This long premise is simply to say that I did not get it: "holey" clearly refers to "hole", !$%*! should be read as !$%*!$ with the English pronounciation, as opposed to the original one (and to regular "what you read is how you pronounce" languages), but what about "shima"?
She-something, I guess. But she-what?
I like RRN. And it took me a few strips to realize that every panel was identical - presumably because the narrative carried it.
But I'm with HelloWorldo regarding puns; those just aren't funny. I like the rest of them.
I'm not sure why, once in a while, puns work so well. Are they very elaborate? Perhaps the headlines on The Daily Show work because they aren't punch lines.
I've registered here just to say this:
I really do like RNN. It has that mix of brilliance, simplicity, stupidity and insults I enjoy the most. I would love it to continue. So that's it. Have a nice day, fellow people.
[So far the robot doesn't seem to be as funny as he thinks he is. Since the robot is just an author avatar for Scott, I guess I'm saying Scott doesn't seem to be good at short gags based on headlines. Well, he does write for a newspaper comic and not a late night talk show comedian. Maybe he just needs to pick his headlines better. I don't know.]
My take on it: hes left his space. Scott has been making millions for years making fun of the office. Thats what hes good at. What hes become good at. Now hes trying a different space. We shouldnt expect him to be as good-as polished-at it for some time.
So far the robot doesn't seem to be as funny as he thinks he is. Since the robot is just an author avatar for Scott, I guess I'm saying Scott doesn't seem to be good at short gags based on headlines. Well, he does write for a newspaper comic and not a late night talk show comedian. Maybe he just needs to pick his headlines better. I don't know.
Stephan Pastis (certainly a friend of yours, Scott) frequently adds puns in his very popular strip Pearls Before Swine. They tend to be fairly elaborate. To borrow from HelloWorldo's comment, the strips are definitely clever, but the last panel is always someone berating Pastis at his desk. Breaking the fifth wall and having himself flogged by his own characters introduces another element ("cruelty," perhaps?) that makes the strip as a whole funny. I'm pretty sure the pun by itself wouldn't work, but he found a way to do it.
After reading in a famous cartoonist's book that puns are not funny, I have been paying attention to puns to determine WHEN they are funny. Over the years, I've noticed a pattern of negativity regarding puns. (And this is important to me because I have a history of using puns extensively.)
Turns out, it seems that a pun is only funny to the person that created it. The only guy that laughs is the guy who makes the pun. Anything else is a sympathy laugh.
When I read the Sunday comics, I skip over the one filled with all the puns (knowing this is the one I could most easily create by myself). It's not even funny in the Jeopardy categories.
Now, you are using puns in a strip. I'm confused. Please correct me on this. You are the expert. A huge part of my life is gone and I'm now embarrassed about all the bad puns I have used in the past.
(I really want to throw in the classic "no pun in ten did" joke, but I'm feeling deflated and confused).
Help me out, Scott. Are puns funny? Or not?
[Excellent question. Puns that are merely clever are not funny. Example: In tennis, love means nothing. Not funny.
Humor, as I have also written, requires at least two of the six necessary dimensions. (clever, bizarre, recognizable, naughty, cute, and cruel). The pun can count for clever, but it needs more. In this case I included naughty as the second dimension. This is the same method used by The Daily Show when they do their funny pun headlines. Additionally, for people who have some special interest in a particular topic, the joke can touch on the recognizable dimension simply for its relevance. That means someone in the nuclear cleanup field would find a Fukushima reference funnier than you do.
In this case, the Fukushima pun is really just a set-up to make you look back at the Uganda pun you probably missed, so it's a double-clever formula with a delayed "I get it" timer. There's more engineering to this than most people realize.
That said, even the best puns with multiple dimensions are only suitable for occasional airing. No more than 20% of the public appreciates even the best in breed. But if a humorist connects with a different 20% of an audience every third try or so, that's a world-class pace. -- Scott]